Associative Socionics Test by Olga Tangemann

[Olga]

Socionics’ Colour Test (SCT)
This test defines your personality type. It was created by the founder of Associative socionics - psychologist and author Tangemann O.B.
A revolutionary non-verbal method of psycho-diagnostics is based on the associative theory of colour- and music preferences with the reference to psychophysiology. It opens a new chapter in objective scientific testing and understanding personality types from the perspective of subconscious preferences.

http://aeterna.qip.ru/user/1748845/tests/

Olga Tangemann 2013 © Associative Socionics

Please, do not get overexcited about this test as non-verbal part is relatively small. Colours and colour combinations attached through the theory to dichotomies as you know if you have read my articles and know the concept of associative socionics.

It is the very first associative test translated in English. They will be more tests later and they will be mainly or fully non-verbal in the future. Some of them will determine not just the type but also psychodynamics which is in the from of a personality profile or TPE profile, type and subtype.

Please, help me with statistics of this test. Do this test not once but 3 times within the break and let me know the results like this:

1) State you name or nickname on this forum
2) State your original type and then the results of this test.

You can send it in private messaging to me if you wish to keep your type secret on this forum. I will code then you name.
And of course I would be glad to hear your feedback about this test.

Kind regards,
Olga

[Absurd]

Got LSE...

[Olga]

Thanks, Absurd!

[ragnar]

Socionics’ Colour Test (SCT)
http://aeterna.qip.ru/user/1748845/tests/ Olga Tangemann 2013 © Associative Socionics

Took the test 3 times, tried to answer as differently as possible each time while keeping the answers correct within my subjective judgement:

1.YOUR TYPE IS: SENSORY EMOTIONAL INTROVERT Dumas. SEI
2.YOUR TYPE IS: INLUITIVE LOGIC INTROVERT Balzac. ILI
3.YOUR TYPE IS: INLUITIVE LOGIC INTROVERT Balzac. ILI

[Roro]

Took it twice because there were a few I didn't know which answer to choose. Got the same result both times. Shrug.


YOUR TYPE IS: INLUITIVE LOGIC INTROVERT
Balzac. ILI have the ability to abstract and philosophical thinking, noticing contradictions in conclusions and pointing them to others (critics). There is always logical reasoning behind their conclusions. ILI are able to see the ways to get the profit, often they do not take the opportunity. They are naturally sceptical and can pour the cold water on someone whom they believe to be overenthusiastic. ILI are often sceptical about themselves and their own potential too. They appear to be shy, reserved and unenthusiastic

[Kim]

IEE

[Narc]

I got ILI.

[ashlesha]

Dumas. SEI enjoy being in and create a conflict-free and relaxed emotional atmosphere. Minimizing negative emotions is more important for them than experiencing the positive emotions. The Hedonists are very good at making the surroundings cosy, the food healthy and tasty and the atmosphere positive and low-key. They are very at any time of their body position, how the touch of the cloth feels or whether the temperature around them is comfortable. Smells, touches, tastes - that is how they perceive the reality around them. SEI can enjoy comfortable position and relaxed atmosphere for hours, whether that is sitting on the warm sand watching the ocean, feeling the wind on their skin, watching the waves or sitting in a chair by the fire, enjoying the warmth of the flames. Their mood and activity level depends highly on their health and comfort - if they are uncomfortable or have, for example, a headache - that would be sufficient to put them off their stride

[Scapegrace]

I got: YOUR TYPE IS: INLUITIVE LOGIC INTROVERT.

I don't think taking it three times in quick succession would be very useful.

[fairylights]

I got SEI.

[Absurd]

LUL.

[Olga]

Dear all,
thanks for trying out the test. It has a very positive feedback on facebook in MBTI group and I started to collect statistics:

your name - your original type - your test results - yes or no

Yes or no means do you agree or disagree with the result of the test. It is just for easy visual identification of the right and wrong result. ) So far I have feedback from 16 people who did the test honestly. 50% got their own type, from the rest only 6% got the result which differ on more than one preference. I did not consider yet your results but I will have a look now.
.

[Olga]

Results:
IEE
IEE
LII

Hi Shayley, there is definetly consistency in your result as regards to IEE type. Is it your original type as you think? I got a feeling that the last result was more or less an experiment to try to change the answers, it is very different from IEE. All results suggest that statics preference is very strong compared to extraversion and irrationality if you would be an irrational extraverted type.

[Olga]

Took the test 3 times, tried to answer as differently as possible each time while keeping the answers correct within my subjective judgement:

1.YOUR TYPE IS: SENSORY EMOTIONAL INTROVERT Dumas. SEI
2.YOUR TYPE IS: INLUITIVE LOGIC INTROVERT Balzac. ILI
3.YOUR TYPE IS: INLUITIVE LOGIC INTROVERT Balzac. ILI

I am not sure what exactly happened in the first result but the two last ones fit your original one which could be considered as success. ILI. The consistency is on the behalf of your type and also on the behalf of your leading TPE - Superid. What do you think about the test so far?

[Olga]

I believe that Roro is an ILI and got twice the right result for himself? I will add this information to statisitcs, thank you!

So Kim also got her result right did the test once.

Narc has one preference different - LIE - LII. Well, it could be that the test result show the subtype but not type. This happens sometimes.)

Lungs, you have SEI as the result and in your profile is ESI. What is your type? Do you agree with the description of SEI. does it fit you better than the description of ESI type?

Scapegrace, did you get your result right? You sound logical and negative, so I think the result could be authentic for you...may be)

Derpface, I see again the same shift from ESI to SEI and think that the reason must be a strong introversion preference compared to rationality and statics like for lungs too. I mean, that it may happen that the test shows actually not your type but subtype. If you and Lungs would do the test 3 times I could have a better idea what is going on. What do you think about the description of SEI, does it fit you well?

For example in case of ragnar his first result was quite different frim the other two and could be misleading about his type.

[Galen]

I got ILE

[Olga]

I have prepared the statisitcs of your results. Please, check it out and correct me, if I am wrong:

Ragnar –ILI –SEI –ILI-ILI – Yes
Kim – IEE –IEE – Yes
Shayley – IEE –IEE-IEE-LII – Yes
Roro – ILI –ILI – Yes
Narc – LIE –LII – No
Lungs – ESI – SEI –No
Scapegrace – ILI –ILI – Yes
Derpface – ESI - SEI - No
Galen - IEE - ILE -No

So far the test results are very promising. Please, check the test out on you friends and relatives, if it works as good as on socionists and let me know

[Olga]

I got ILE

Not bad at all! Thank you. I added your result into the statistics. By the first look I thought it was LIE instead of ILE. I think I need to have a break and have a kit-kat.))

[Reficulris]

IEI

[Olga]

IEI

Hi, Reficulris. Do you agree with the result or not? What is your type?

[Reficulris]

Hi, Reficulris. Do you agree with the result or not? What is your type?

not sure yet. However, IEI is the result most test yield for me.

[Saberstorm]

I got ILI once, ILI twice and then IEI.

[Narc]

I have prepared the statisitcs of your results. Please, check it out and correct me, if I am wrong:

Ragnar –ILI –SEI –ILI-ILI – Yes
Kim – IEE –IEE – Yes
Shayley – IEE –IEE-IEE-LII – Yes
Roro – ILI –ILI – Yes
Narc – LIE –LII – No
Lungs – ESI – SEI –No
Scapegrace – ILI –ILI – Yes
Derpface – ESI - SEI - No
Galen - IEE - ILE -No

So far the test results are very promising. Please, check the test out on you friends and relatives, if it works as good as on socionists and let me know

Mine was ILI, not LII.

[SyrupDeGem]

My test result was IEE

YOUR TYPE IS: INTUITIVE ETHICAL EXTRAVERT

Huxley. IEE are naturally psychologists. They are able to build an opinion about a person very quickly and correctly. IEE enjoy helping people to expand their talents and encourage people to the self-growth and personal development. IEE have very good interpersonal skills and are able to find the individual approach to very different people. IEE are easily distracted, spontaneous,often have a spur-of-a-moment ideas. Their interests are broad and always changing being their life force. They looking for new experiences and wish to be in a new kind of situations and to be inspired by the new concepts. IEE see the multiple potential outcomes of a given situation and are able to hold them all in their head at the same time in order to see the essence of a situation. They see the hidden opportunities and can quickly find the way out of the problematic situation. While talking they often switch from one point to another ignoring the structure. IEE have a strong sense of morals and though they generally try to avoid a conflict, they would stand up for their opinion if their moral principals were confronted

I'm a little surprised though as there were several questions i was unsure about. The pink/green and red/green combos I felt repelled by even though green is my favourite colour.

The cluster questions relating to prospective employment roles could be more clearly defined... they are a touch confusing to read in English.

That's my tuppence worth.

[InvisibleJim]

Your type is: Intuitive Logic Introvert
Balzac. ILI have the ability to abstract and philosophical thinking, noticing contradictions in conclusions and pointing them to others (critics). There is always logical reasoning behind their conclusions. ILI are able to see the ways to get the profit, often they do not take the opportunity. They are naturally sceptical and can pour the cold water on someone whom they believe to be overenthusiastic. ILI are often sceptical about themselves and their own potential too. They appear to be shy, reserved and unenthusiastic

InvisibleJim - ILI -Yes

[DaftPunk]

1. IEI
2. SLI
3. SLI

SLI tend switch easily the topic of conversation and start talking about things without any obvious connection with the previous topic.

This is very characteristic for me.

Might be that I missclicked during the first test because even though I am unsure of my typ i never considered Fe-Ego types.

[Scapegrace]

I took it again and got ILI once more.

Boring. I suppose it's "correct."

[Olga]

I took it again and got ILI once more.

Boring. I suppose it's "correct."

The next tests will be more fun - promise!

[Olga]

1. IEI
2. SLI
3. SLI

SLI tend switch easily the topic of conversation and start talking about things without any obvious connection with the previous topic.

This is very characteristic for me.

Might be that I missclicked during the first test because even though I am unsure of my typ i never considered Fe-Ego types.

To a certain degree it is characteristic to all sensing types because they live in the world here and now and attention is directed to immediate stimuli in the environment. And may be more suits to LSE and SLI. My mum LSE often started the sentence and says something from the middle of topic and I wonder what is she talking about and what does it mean, relate to?
It could be related to Ti in the vital block, the luck of thought structure.
Is the result of SLI consistent with the results of other tests and what type fits better for you SLI or LSI?
Your results show strong preference towards Superid - type of energy which is irrational introversion.

[Olga]

My test result was IEE
I'm a little surprised though as there were several questions i was unsure about. The pink/green and red/green combos I felt repelled by even though green is my favourite colour.

The cluster questions relating to prospective employment roles could be more clearly defined... they are a touch confusing to read in English.

That's my tuppence worth.

Hi, Geminatronix!
I assume from your post that the result is right for you and consistent with other test results. What are you surprised about- that the test did show the right result even though you were unsure about some answers and choice of colours? I wish to think that test is robust and the concept is true and the presentation is simple for all to understand and make choice.
In case of wrong result the test shows a shift of preference which could happen because the person consciously choosing what he likes. The person knows his type well and what to choose to be right but wish to test the test and show the preference for something else. Cheating the test. This is not a rare case when socionists do the test.

It would be interesting to check out the test for not socionists and compare with the results of another popular verbal test.

If you have been repelled by combo of green with red or pink that could mean that irrationality is stronger that statics or extraversion in your psychodynamics. The next test is called the pattern test will check psychodynamics profile and we shall see if this hypothesis about you is right.

I agree that the wording in the test about the job could be improved. I am open to suggestions to anybody, please, write here or in private messaging the ideas how to improve it and I will be thankful for any help. ))

[Olga]

I got ILI once, ILI twice and then IEI.

Love your signature - local hero!
Not sure what is going on, it looks like you show strong preference to TPE Superid and irrational introversion. If we assume that the test is wrong and your type is LII, then what you get is a subtype ILI. As regards to psychodynamic profile that means that introversion is stronger compared to statics and rationality. What do you think about it? Is the result ILI consistent with the results of other tests? What do you usually get on tests?
And yes, your appearance is consistent with LII more in my opinion!

[Olga]

Dear all,

The results of the test are promising! The difference from the original type is nearly always by the shift in TPE-group only.
People chose Jung functions nearly always right.
Half or more than half of the people show the right result!!!!!


Test statistics has been moved to the English speaking forum.

http://socionics4you.com/smforum/ind...63.html#msg763

Please, feel free to post here your result:

Number, name, original type (put ? if unsure); the results of the test (up to three results); Yes (consistent with the original type and/or he other tests results); No (not true and/or not consistent with the results of other tests)

[squirreltual]

I was trying to answer as honestly as possible and got LSE, LIE, then LSE. It obviously works for others so I'm probably just trying to be a snowflake/suck at tests.

[Absurd]

I was trying to answer as honestly as possible and got LSE, LIE, then LSE. It obviously works for others so I'm probably just trying to be a snowflake/suck at tests.

Tests are going to give you a finished product any time, any place, and like Olga wrote before, as long you answer honestly, you're going to get what you came for. No tests are crap - it's the human error that craps them. Something I've seen on this site way too many times.

[squirreltual]

Tests are going to give you a finished product any time, any place, and like Olga wrote before, as long you answer honestly, you're going to get what you came for. No tests are crap - it's the human error that craps them.

That's what I was saying...

[Absurd]

That's what I was saying...

Exactly.

[squirreltual]

Exactly.

I'm glad we had this chat.

[Narc]

Quote from: Absurd;972064

Tests are going to give you a finished product any time, any place, and like Olga wrote before, as long you answer honestly, you're going to get what you came for. No tests are crap - it's the human error that craps them. Something I've seen on this site way too many times.

[Absurd]

I'm glad we had this chat.

No problem.

Quote from: Absurd;972064

Tests are going to give you a finished product any time, any place, and like Olga wrote before, as long you answer honestly, you're going to get what you came for. No tests are crap - it's the human error that craps them. Something I've seen on this site way too many times.

LUL. Take several of them at the same time and track your scores, genius. If every single one is going to produce something else from the desired result you have floating in your 'head', then something is wrong.

And I'm not saying you're lacking a strong sense of self at all...

Lul @Gamma

[Narc]

No problem.



LUL. Take several of them at the same time and track your scores, genius. If every single one is going to produce something else from the desired result you have floating in your 'head', then something is wrong.

And I'm not saying you're lacking a strong sense of self at all...

You're honestly not worth the keystrokes it takes to argue with. You'll still be just as stupid tomorrow as you were today.